[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Pushkar vs State Of Rajasthan (2026:Rj-Jd:8223) on 13 February, 2026
[2026:RJ-JD:8223]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 10603/2025
Pushkar S/o Shri Kana Meena, Aged About 27 Years, Chittori
Police Station Devgarh District Pratapgarh Rajasthan (Presently
Lodged In Dist. Jail Cittorgarh)
----Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Ashok Bishnoi
Mr. Naresh Bishnoi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sameer Pareek, PP
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR
Order
13/02/2026
1. The petitioner has filed this bail application under Section
483 of BNSS in FIR No.198/2025 registered at Police Station
Gangrar, District Chittorgarh for offence under Sections 8/22, 8/29
of NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned
Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner
has been falsely implicated in the present case. It is further
contended that no contraband has been recovered from the
conscious possession of the present petitioner. The alleged
recovery has, in fact, been effected from the co-accused, namely
Sunil Dudi. It is further submitted that at the time of seizure, the
contraband was alleged to be MDMA; however, as per the FSL
report, the substance has been found to be Mephedrone, weighing
51 grams, which is marginally above the commercial quantity.
Learned counsel submits that as per the seizure memo, the weight
of 51 grams was recorded along with the plastic pouch containing
the contraband. It is contended that the commercial quantity of
(Uploaded on 13/02/2026 at 04:54:11 PM)
[2026:RJ-JD:8223] (2 of 2) [CRLMB-10603/2025]
Mephedrone is 50 grams and, therefore, if the weight of the
plastic pouch is excluded, there exists a reasonable possibility that
the actual quantity of the contraband may fall below the
prescribed commercial quantity. On the aforesaid premise, it is
argued that the rigour of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not be
attracted in the present case. It is further submitted that the
petitioner has been in judicial custody since 19.07.2025 and has
no criminal antecedents. The trial of the case may take
considerable time and no further custodial interrogation is
required, hence the bail application of the petitioner may be
allowed.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor has vehemently opposed the bail
application.
5. On consideration of the rival submissions and material
available on record and in the light of submission made by learned
counsel for the petitioner but without expressing any opinion on
merits/demerits of the case, I am inclined to grant benefit of bail
to the petitioner.
6. Consequently, the bail application under Section 483
B.N.S.S. is allowed and it is directed that the petitioner Pushkar
S/o Shri Kana Meena, be released on bail provided he furnishes
a personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with two sureties in the
sum of Rs.25,000/- each to the satisfaction of the learned trial
court with the stipulation that he shall appear before that Court on
all subsequent dates of hearing till conclusion of the trial.
(PRAMIL KUMAR MATHUR),J
9-AnilKC/-
(Uploaded on 13/02/2026 at 04:54:11 PM)
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
